Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 23STCV06287, Date: 2024-01-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV06287    Hearing Date: January 10, 2024    Dept: 39

Tanisha Johnson v. General Motors, LLC

Case No. 23STCV06287

Demurrer and Motion to Strike

            Plaintiff Tanisha Johnson (“Plaintiff”) filed this case under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act against General Motors, LLC (“Defendant”).  Defendant demurs to the fifth cause of action (fraudulent inducement-concealment) and moves to strike the prayer for punitive damages. 

Plaintiff must allege fraud with particularity.  “This means: (1) general pleading of the legal conclusion of fraud is insufficient; and (2) every element of the cause of action for fraud must be alleged in full, factually and specifically, and the policy of liberal construction of pleading will not usually be invoked to sustain a pleading that is defective in any material respect.”  (Wilhelm v. Pray, Price, Williams & Russell (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1324, 1331.)  There are four circumstances in which nondisclosure or concealment may constitute actionable fraud: (1) when the defendant is in a fiduciary relationship with the plaintiff; (2) when the defendant had exclusive knowledge of material facts not known to the plaintiff; (3) when the defendant actively conceals a material fact from the plaintiff; and (4) when the defendant makes partial representations but also suppresses some material facts.”  (LiMandri v. Judkins (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 326, 336, internal quotations and citations omitted.) 

In this case, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant “knew (or should have known) that the cooling system had one or more defects that can result in various problems . . . .”  (First Amended Complaint, ¶ 62.)  Plaintiff alleges, “that while Defendant . . . knew about the cooling system defect, Defendant . . . nevertheless concealed and failed to disclose the defective nature of the Vehicle cooling system to Plaintiff prior to and at the time of sale and thereafter.”  (First Amended Complaint, ¶ 64.)  Plaintiff does not allege specific facts to support these conclusory allegations.  Plaintiff does not allege any facts demonstrating that she had contact with Defendants and does not identify any specific misrepresentations.  Plaintiff alleges only that there was a default, of which Defendant allegedly was aware, and that this defect was not disclosed.  These allegations do not satisfy the heightened pleading standard for a fraud claim.  Otherwise, there would be a fraud claim in every Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty case (since every such case involves these types of allegations). 

Based upon the foregoing, the Court rules as follows:

1.         The Court sustains Defendant’s demurrer to the fifth cause of action.

2.         The Court grants the motion to strike the prayer for punitive damages, having sustained the demurrer to the fraud claim.

3.         The Court denies leave to amend, as Plaintiff’s counsel identifies no supplemental facts that would satisfy the pleading standard.

4.         Defendant shall file an answer within thirty (30) days.

5.         Defendant’s counsel shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.